create_schedule

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It merely states 'Create an availability schedule' with no mention of side effects, permissions, idempotency, or any operational constraints. The input schema hints at behavior (e.g., 400 error without is_default) but the description itself adds zero behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, which is concise but lacks structure. While it earns its place by stating the purpose, it does not front-load additional context or use any formatting. For a tool with 4 parameters and an output schema, a more structured description would be beneficial.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (4 parameters, output schema, many siblings), the description is insufficient. It fails to mention key aspects like the purpose of the schedule, time zone handling, the significance of is_default, or any constraints. The output schema exists but the description does not reference it or explain what the tool returns.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the input schema already provides for each parameter. It does not explain parameter relationships, formats, or constraints beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Create an availability schedule' uses a specific verb 'Create' and resource 'availability schedule', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_schedules, get_schedule, update_schedule, and delete_schedule. The purpose is immediately clear and unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, no context for when not to use it, and no mention of the required 'is_default' field's significance. The user must infer usage solely from the tool name and schema.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.